You are on page 1of 12

Real data from the Hiroshima Bomb shows that the Japanese ABomb study conclusions are false

Chris Busby PhD

Green Audit, Aberystywth January 2010

The current radiation risk model is based mainly on the US funded studies of the ABomb cohorts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The yield of leukaemia and cancer in those exposed to the prompt A-Bomb radiation effects has been compared to the yield in socalled unexposed controls who entered the cities after the bombing. Much has been written about this Life Span Study, which continues. Among other criticisms is that the study was not begun until 1953, some seven years after the bombing. As a result of the LSS study and also other investigations made by the USA authorities three things have become conventional wisdom and are employed in arguments dismissing evidence of radiation effects on health: 1. The time lag between exposure and onset of leukaemia is 7 years, therefore any leukemias arising immediately after an exposure cannot have been caused by the exposure. 2. There was no fallout or residual radiation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the bombs exploded in the air above the cities. 3. There were no heritable defects in those who were exposed. All of these statements are falsified by a report of the Japanese Preparatory Committee for Le Congres Mondial des Medecins pour lEtude des conditions Actuelles de Vie edited by Dr Nobio Kusano and published in Tokyo in 1953. Appropriate pages of this report have been scanned and are presented here. We see that leukaemia incidence began to rise immediately (months) after the exposures. We also see evidence of heritable damage in children born after the bombing. We see evidence of areas of radioactivity due to fallout. This copy of this book was obtained in the papers of the late Dr Don Arnott, an early and tireless proponent of the view that the current radiation risk model is unsafe and is maintained in position only by the activities of the rogue scientists who support the nuclear military project.